> With some of the new popular digi protocols most of what is written on the > screen, some call it "received", has never been received as a complete > message. It is reproduced from other sources than the radio path.
> "without entering already known information (calls) to the software I > wouldn't have been even close to where I am now.." Both are true when you use a DXCLUSTER. Any spotting network will give you the whole call already. No need to decode it yourself, received over the internet, a non radio path. Even better, it’s spotted by a RBN Bot without human intervention. I don’t think we need to go down that rabbit whole. I am with Bob, AA6VB - we are not forced to use the new modes. On the other hand, these new modes enable a whole new layer of operators. A new target rich environment for more opportunities to work new DX. The RF still has to go from A to B to be decoded. 73, Andreas, N6NU > On Oct 25, 2017, at 10:50 AM, Peter Sundberg <sm2...@telia.com> wrote: > > Jay, please don't compare the new digi protocols with RTTY, a character based > protocol. > > What you see on the screen or paper in RTTY has actually been sent, and is > received as it was sent. Or it is garbled because the link is not good enough. > > With some of the new popular digi protocols most of what is written on the > screen, some call it "received", has never been received as a complete > message. It is reproduced from other sources than the radio path. > > As a well known 6m op said after summing up his Zero to DXCC journey this > last summer - "without entering already known information (calls) to the > software I wouldn't have been even close to where I am now.." > > BIG difference - no wonder the users of new digi protocols apply for a DXCC > award after a week. Try that with RTTY. > > 73 > Peter SM2CEW > > > At 13:38 2017-10-25, jayb1...@optonline.net wrote: >> I guess I donât understand what makes the new Digital modes any different >> from old RTTY...the âsoundsâ are similar enuf to learn to love and the >> words are still displayed on (in the old days) paper or a screen. There are >> many audibly-compromised hams out there such as me ââ who really welcome >> a mode that doesnât require sharp hearing to work CW or especially SSB. In >> addition, I have recruited several new (young) hams by attracting them with >> the computer-based modes...all but eliminates âmike-frightâ and >> âkey-freezingâ. I guess a lot of old-timers (I am 75) feel that the >> awards like DXCC and WAS, etc. earned with FT8 have less merit than they did >> with good-old CW or Phone or RTTY. But few people objected when CW filters >> were invented or SSB replaced AM or smaller, lighter, more efficient radios >> replaced the old tube stuff...so is a CW DXCC earned in 1948 somehow worth >> more than one earned in 2000 using these major tech improvements ? There >> will always be a place for CW and voice modes in ham radio for those that >> want to practice those..and remember one of the major facets of ham radio is >> to âadvance the state of the radio artâ which surely describes the new >> digital modes. Room for everybody out there, guys....73 Jay NY2NY >> _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - >> http://www.contesting.com/_topband > > > _________________ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
